I want to take a different slant on this discussion surrounding the new payments and stipends system for American college student athletes.
Generally I don't care for the new methodology of payment calculation, but I especially have a problem with citing the new influx of dollars from TV/Cable as the main impetus for sharing this newly found largesse with the student/athlete/players.
But --- If the colleges are going to be taking income from TV/Cable/Broadcast contracts, and Seats Rights/License sales, and Game Ticket sales, and Athletic Program Contributions, and then distributing a share of this income to student/athletes on the basis that the student/athletes have equity and deserve the payment as 'employees', to some extent, then why shouldn't all stakeholders be treated in a similar way? All stakeholders contribute to the success of an enterprise and College Sports should not be an exception, if we are going to view it as an enterprise.
What I mean is that the Ticket buyers and the Seat License buyers/holders and the Program Contributors also have equity in the teams and Programs. Just as the student/athletes themselves. Shouldn't they,then, have a similar right to receive something in return for their 'investment'.
The student/athlete already got an education. The ticket buyer already got to watch the game. The Seat License holder already got the right to buy preferred location tickets. The Program contributor already got the right to help his school and take a tax deduction.
Now the 'networks' come in and raise the ante. They disturb the status quo....significantly They increase the Power5 Program incomes by 10-30% (roughly). So the student/athletes now want a piece of the that larger pie. They want some cash to help them attend college, additional to their scholarships.
Ok, so if we are going to use that model, then why shouldn't the other three classes of stakeholders receive something additional also?
Take some of that new incremental program income and distribute it to all stakeholders. Student/athletes, ticket buyers, seat license holders and program contributors (many of whom actually build all the facilities).
Every season in Louisville there are roughly 500 student/athletes, 10,000 program contributors, 900,000 ticket buying transactions, and 50,000 seat license buyer/holders.
Why shouldn't all the stakeholders be treated the same?
Anyway, I don't like the new college athletics moves which are aimed at taking new money and giving a portion of it to student/athletes and not to all stakeholders in common.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Guardman
Generally I don't care for the new methodology of payment calculation, but I especially have a problem with citing the new influx of dollars from TV/Cable as the main impetus for sharing this newly found largesse with the student/athlete/players.
But --- If the colleges are going to be taking income from TV/Cable/Broadcast contracts, and Seats Rights/License sales, and Game Ticket sales, and Athletic Program Contributions, and then distributing a share of this income to student/athletes on the basis that the student/athletes have equity and deserve the payment as 'employees', to some extent, then why shouldn't all stakeholders be treated in a similar way? All stakeholders contribute to the success of an enterprise and College Sports should not be an exception, if we are going to view it as an enterprise.
What I mean is that the Ticket buyers and the Seat License buyers/holders and the Program Contributors also have equity in the teams and Programs. Just as the student/athletes themselves. Shouldn't they,then, have a similar right to receive something in return for their 'investment'.
The student/athlete already got an education. The ticket buyer already got to watch the game. The Seat License holder already got the right to buy preferred location tickets. The Program contributor already got the right to help his school and take a tax deduction.
Now the 'networks' come in and raise the ante. They disturb the status quo....significantly They increase the Power5 Program incomes by 10-30% (roughly). So the student/athletes now want a piece of the that larger pie. They want some cash to help them attend college, additional to their scholarships.
Ok, so if we are going to use that model, then why shouldn't the other three classes of stakeholders receive something additional also?
Take some of that new incremental program income and distribute it to all stakeholders. Student/athletes, ticket buyers, seat license holders and program contributors (many of whom actually build all the facilities).
Every season in Louisville there are roughly 500 student/athletes, 10,000 program contributors, 900,000 ticket buying transactions, and 50,000 seat license buyer/holders.
Why shouldn't all the stakeholders be treated the same?
Anyway, I don't like the new college athletics moves which are aimed at taking new money and giving a portion of it to student/athletes and not to all stakeholders in common.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Guardman